Updates: Goose Visitor, Cambridge City Council Hypocrisy

1. Goose Visitor.

We have been in contact with the Animal Rescue League of Boston representative for this area.

A little explanation on organizational responsibilities.  When Friends of the White Geese became aggressively involved on the Charles River, Reen Littlebrook, a native American living in the nearby Allston Neighborhood of Boston was their best friend.  He functioned as that for about ten years.

He got a bicycle.  The second day he used the bicycle he wound up in the hospital, followed by a nursing home, followed by continuing recuperation at home.  FOWG took over his responsibilities for several months.  We then created a totally separate tax-exempt organization for that purpose, the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative.  They have done the feeding and care ever since.  It has been necessary because of the continuing and accelerating heartless animal abuse by the Cambridge City Council and the Department of Conservation and Recreation.  

CRUWI does an excellent job, but are at their maximum.  People interested in helping should visit the goose meadow, their Destroyed Nesting Area, and say hello to CRUWI members feeding the geese.  FEEDING BY HUMANS IS ESSENTIAL BECAUSE OF THE DELIBERATE STARVATION BY THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL AND DCR.  Offer to help in the necessary activities in response to the continuing and accelerating reprehensible government behavior.

Here is a photo of Littlebrook feeding the geese.  We arranged a meeting with MassDOT on their activities in the area.  We invited him.  He happily came and very happily visited with his friends.

The representative of ARL was formerly in the employ of the Tufts Veterinary School in a similar capacity.  When FOWG was directly managing the care of the CRWG, Tufts Vet School we looked around for care providers.  Tufts Vets were the ONLY vets we trusted for care.

ARL has been in the Back Bay Fens looking for the visiting white goose.  They have spotted her and will pick her up this week to provide care and RESPONSIBLE adoption management.

In the meantime, the visiting goose has an excellent goosedown jacket.  Her big problem is human and dog predators.  Hopefully she will keep in a safe location until ARL can pick her up.

2. Cambridge City Council nonsense.

I put my post in the form of a letter to the Cambridge City Council and delivered it to them Monday night along with comments pointing out the contents which were place on the record.  

An added horror was an initiative by the Cambridge City Council to research the use of the city’s golf course.  Given the reprehensible behavior of the Cambridge City Council on the Charles River and at Alewife and way too many other locations,, such an action is highly scary and I said so, going point by point to my post as example.

3, References.

A. Section 1, above.  “A Visiting White Goose,” posted at https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2022/01/a-visiting-white-goose.html, this blog, January 17, 2022. 

B. Section 2, above. “More hypocrisy coming from the Cambridge City Council, ACCELERATING environmental outrages coming WHILE piously proclaiming sainthood,” https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2022/01/more-hypocrisy-coming-from-cambridge.html, this blog, January 23, 2022.

More hypocrisy coming from the Cambridge City Council, ACCELERATING environmental outrages coming WHILE piously proclaiming sainthood.

More hypocrisy coming from the Cambridge City Council, ACCELERATING environmental outrages coming WHILE piously proclaiming sainthood.

I am going to do this report in two parts.  First the basics.  Second, I will document in detail if I have time.  The reality is that a very major time crunch is applied to people who want to stand up to outrages in preparation for City Council meetings.  

I can and repeatedly do provide plenty of details, but not with this time limit.  Each such report takes WEEKS.  

URL to City Manager agenda is in section 1.C.

1. Pending outrages

A. Cambridge City Council is considering 

(1) NET-ZERO plans supposedly plans preventing destruction of the environment.  But the plans do NOT END OR EVEN MENTION destruction of the publicly owned parts of the environment,

City Manager Communications 1 and 4 on Monday, January 24 agenda; City Council order 5 on Monday January 24 agenda.

and

(2) they are yelling at the other guy about firs, WITHOUT ending their own heartless abuse of free beings.

City Council order 5.

B. Department of Conservation and Recreation concentrating on destruction west of Harvard Square THIS time.

Cambridge Day Report on the latest DCR / Cambridge outrage: https://www.cambridgeday.com/2022/01/17/state-brings-back-its-plans-for-memorial-drive-unannounced-and-changed-without-explanation/

I have repeatedly provided the Cambridge City Council with the official plans and relevant photos at Magazine Beach.

Here is my fact sheet on this latest outrage from the then NINE members of the Cambridge City Council.  It is not accomplished yet, but the City Council does not want to know about the City Council’s record, and the last thing the City Council will do is reverse yet another outrage of the Cambridge City Council.

C. City Council Agenda for January 24, 2022.

Full official details.

https://cambridgema.iqm2.com/citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3568&Inline=True.

2. Appropriate Action for Cambridge City Council.

A. End all plans and funding to destroy yet more trees and animal habitat and river water on the Charles River, and stop PAYING the Charles River Poisoner to do “environmental” work.

Here is my video documenting the destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges in January 2016.  The city council’s “response” was to yell at circuses passing through the city on public roads about the circuses’ supposed abuse of animals, while totally ignoring the heartless abuse of animals by the DCR and Cambridge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

Just as in January 2016, the DCR is destroying Cherry Trees, as many as they can get away all the time.

Here is my letter of June 6, 2016 passing on the DCR’s official filing of destruction plans to the Cambridge Conservation Commission, along with relevant photos.  Repeatedly provided and repeatedly ignored by the Cambridge City Council while voting to make things worse, VOTES AS SECRET AS POSSIBLE, offset by nonstop nonsense yelling at other guys bragged about.

http://www.friendsofthewhitegeese.org/ar1.htm.

B. Stop the lobbying of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation to add to their rebuild of I90, the Massachusetts Turnpike, destructive projects which impact Cambridge.  Frequently repeating attempts which failed in Cambridge because of public opposition.

C. End the use of poisons on the banks of the Charles and in other animal habitat.

D. Stop starving / poisoning the free animals whether on land, in the water, or in the air, especially the Charles River White Geese.  Allow the Charles River White to return without constraints to UNPOISONED playing fields at Magzine Beach which have been their homes and food for most of the last 40 years.  Unpoisoned maintenance survived for the better part of a Century.  

Poison maintenance has failed but is being expanded.  In spite of the obviously failure including the poisoning of the Charles River, the DCR has refused to deny plans to use poisons on open space created as part of the I90 Rebuild project.

E. Reduce the other outrages of the past twenty years.

F. Petition the State Legislature to replace the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation on the Charles River with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.

G. Stop yelling at the other guy to hide the extreme environmental irresponsibility of the City of Cambridge.

H. Stop HIRING AND PAYING the woman who poisoned the Charles River (using DCR and Trump moneys) to work on Charles River “environmental issues.”.

Here is a photo of the work she did rerouting the poisons dumped on the Magazine Beach playing fields into the Charles River.

Here is a composite photo of the sign the DCR has posted bragging that the poison drainage ditches protect the Charles from the POISONS BEING INTRODUCED INTO THE ENVIRONMENT BY DCR AND THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL, subordinate photos from Phil Barber, composite by me.

3. Speaking.

Taken from the city’s webpage.

Follow the link here:  https://www.cambridgema.gov/publiccomment to register to speak.

4. Details.

I can dream of having the time, YET AGAIN, to repeat the outrages from this reprehensible and hypocritical city council.  I suggest looking at the Charles River White Geese page on Facebook, or looking at The Charles River White Geese Blog at charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com in the meantime.  I spend weeks doing a modest write up of the accelerating outrages.

Follow either one back.  A whole bunch of information.

A Visiting White Goose

 A Visiting White Goose

1. Visiting Goose.

2. Analysis.

A. General.

B. The location.

C. The Visiting Goose.

D. Long term options.

3. The nature of these reports.

1. Visiting Goose.

Kristen Higgins, a few days ago, let us know about a visiting white goose in the Boston Open Space behind the Boston Museum of Fine Arts.  She has joined the Charles River White Geese Page on Face book and shared the visit.  Here is her report.

She tells me that she did not see the goose the next day.

2. Analysis.

A. General.

First of all, I strongly appreciate the report and appreciate any and all such input in our area.

I will summarize in the concluding section our organizational situation and ways to contact.

B. The location.

Here is a map of the area cropped from Google Maps.

The remnants of the habitat of the Charles River White Geese is in the upper left corner.  The BU Bridge is the first bridge on the Charles River to the right of the left corner.  The Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese is to the upper right of the BU Bridge.

Kristen saw the visitor “behind the Museum of Fine Arts.”  This is above and slightly to the right of the middle, bottom.

The location where she viewed the visiting goose is the Boston Fens, owned and managed RESPONSIBLY by the City of Boston.  The Fens is constructed around the Muddy River.  The Muddy river is the center of the Fens.  The Muddy River and related parkland starts at the left bottom of our map and runs vaguely diagonally up and to the right.  After that, the Muddy River has been buried and moves pretty much down and to the right from the top point to the portion of the Fens where Kristen’s goose was seen.  About two thirds of this area is above ground, the balance in pipes, 

Kristen saw the goose behind the MFA, as seen on the map.  

The Fens moves up and to the right to a point where the Muddy River goes through a series of pipes with ground level appearances, traveling under a major but local highway area to the Charles River.

The Muddy River flows into the Charles a little bit to the left of the bridge on the right, the Mass. Ave. (officially “Harvard” ) Bridge.

When the Charles River White Geese first came to the Charles River in 1981, their habitat went far beyond Magazine Beach at the upper left and extended most of the way on the Cambridge side toward the Mass. Ave. Bridge.  They traveled the Charles, going on land to feed.  Almost all of that habitat has been ruthlessly destroyed by the Mass. Dept. of Conservation and Recreation with major leadership and sharing work by the City of Cambridge.

Here is a larger blow up and cropping of the same Google Maps presentation, emphasizing the Charles River White Geese.

The big green area to the left is mostly Magazine Beach where the Charles River White Geese spent most of their lives living and feeding until Cambridge and the Cambridge City Council and the DCR started heartlessly starving them.  The Destroyed Nesting Area is recognized by Google Maps at the top of and to the right of the BU Bridge.  Below I will mention and provide a photo of the cove which is still warm in the worst of winter.  It is to the right of the now foodless Destroyed Nesting Area.  It is the portion of the river to the right of the DNA.  The outcropping to its right is a Boston University Boathouse.

If you closely examine these two maps, you will see a lot of areas I have reported on in these reports.  The purpose of this particular report is to report on the visiting goose.  I therefore will refrain from providing a tour.

C. The Visiting Goose.

As Kristen comments, she did not see the visiting goose on the next day.

The Fens is well furnished with vegetation of all sorts.  There are many places where a visiting goose could seek shelter, including but not limited to vegetation and bridges.

Here is a larger blow up and cropping of the same Google Maps presentation emphasizing the parkland around the Muddy River in this location.

The map shows the system of foot paths which include a lot of bridges and vegetation.

This type of white goose looks like the geese who are dominant among the Charles River White Geese.  But the Charles River White Geese have lived on the Charles for more than 40 years.  That translates into many generations.  Other breeds have been abandoned in the area and intermated, plus the White Geese themselves have birthed animals with vestigial markings who have gone to mate.  So while the gaggle still is predominately this variety, there is a great deal of variety.

There are bridges and there are pipes.  The Charles River White Geese are strong fliers, but they are practical.  Why waste a bunch of energy flying when they can walk there?

It is unlikely that the goose came from the portion of parkland to the left because of the piping between the two.  This blow up, however, does better show the very real area to the left of the MFA area which is at surface.  That area is reasonable for movement of the goose.  I similarly, I cropped to the parkland and the cropping at the top right is exactly at the limits of parkland.  As with the area to the left, they would have to fly to get up beyond that point.  They do not fly unless necessary.

One explanation for flight in either direction is the presence of and possible attack by predators, dogs or humans.  Possible.

The visitor could be a lost member of the gaggle of the Charles River White Geese.  Possible, a long shot, but long shots happen.  As shown on the first map, the location is a good distance from the area where I would expect to see the gaggle.  Not impossible, and the not impossible can happen.  

It is also possible that the visitor came from the left.  The nearest extensive area in that direction is Jamaica Pond although there is a series of bridges which definitely could allow travel.  If any readers are aware of White Geese population in that area, I would be pleased to learn of it.  Please contact me at boblat@yahoo.com.

The area within the curve of the Fens is historical apartment buildings at historical scale, not many particularly high, except recent construction on the two streets above the area in the curve are quite large buildings.  And there are many older buildings all around the area beyond these limits.

Additionally, there is a fair amount of street parking in the area between the Fens and neighboring streets.  Kristen could have been admiring the visitor while the owner of the visitor could have been admiring her.

This last possibility opens up the decidedly not unusual situation of abandonment.  As I said, the gaggle of the Charles River White Geese includes abandoned geese who were welcomed into the gaggle.

Ginger’s comment that he “seems lost” probably says this is the situation.

D. Long term options.

In sharp contrast to the situation on the Charles River, the Boston parklands include food, something which has been destroyed by Cambridge and the DCR WITH PLANS FOR FURTHER DESTRUCTION.

On the other hand, the Cambridge side of the Charles River is meaningfully separated from human residences.  HUMANS ARE DANGEROUS.

There certainly is the wild possibility that the visitor could fly to the Charles River and join the Charles River White Geese.  The very major benefit is that warm cove which probably is related to the presence of the Boston University Boat House.

Here is a photo of the Charles River White Geese in that cove during a recent bitterly cold winter.

This photo was taken from the Memorial Drive sidewalk above the Wild Area which is between the Charles River’s cove and Memorial Drive.

BUT the Cambridge and DCR bureaucrats have plans to destroy the Wild Area, plans that the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, the third entity involved, have disrupted.  MassDOT looks like the adult in the room among the reprehensible Cambridge operatives and the DCR.

Then, there is that much greater proximity in the Fens to humans.  It adds the very great risk of human predators who could be dangerous.  The Fens is the most visible part of the area of the Muddy River between Jamaica Pond (if that is the Muddy) and the Charles River.

So the future, if any, of the visiting white goose is hard to say.  He / she could very easily still be in the area but showing great instinct for survival and keeping as far away from humans as possible.

Since he is friendly and probably abandoned, he would likely, by friend or foe, be amenable to being moved.  The DNA has organized feeders, a response to the heartless starvation being inflicted by Cambridge and the DCR.  Moving him there as fast as possible would be a good idea.

I understand the Animal Rescue League was called.  They would offer him for adoption.  I would prefer to get him to the DNA, but that choice would get him away from dog and human predators.

3. The nature of these reports.

These reports are a triad.

The blog reports are the core, the place where it is possible to analyze in detail.  But the blog reports are not convenient to make comments.

I do condensations of the blog reports on Facebook and in an email newsletter.  Nowadays, the two have the same content, with the very major exception that Face book can be amended should errors be seen or comments seem to be needed.  I usually leave the Face book condensations a few days to see if somebody yells, and then sent things out to the email list.

The Charles River White Geese page on Facebook (plus my own page) is where the condensations go and it is relatively simple for comments to be made.  This blog has been read by people in 120 countries, and the international reading is about 40% of the distribution.  The Face book page is open to people who want to friend it and I accept.  My accepting is of major importance because of past experiences with folks who want to do things different from the nature of the page.  I screen closely and reject heavily.

But, the Charles River White Geese page on Facebook has a meaningful international component.

Please feel free to offer to friend the Charles River White Geese, but be certain that your home page has content which shows an interest parallels our interests.  I look at the individual’s pages very carefully.  I do not want a nightmare.

And, frankly I like all kinds of animals and consider interest in dogs and cats parallel to interest in the Charles River White Geese.  Friends of the White Geese had a treasurer who was a great bird person.  She operated a shelter for small birds in her home.  It was lovely.  A lot of cages, but lovely.

Cambridge on “Tenant Protection,” Part V of an historical series.

Cambridge on “Tenant Protection,”   Part V of an historical series.

1. Introduction.

2. Very Early General History of Condo Conversion / Tenant Protections.

A. My record.

B. Cambridge moves away from the Radicals of the 60's.

3. Evolvement of Tenant Rights, the first Condo Conversion protections.

4. Zoning, tenant issues and reality in Cambridge.  .

5. The internal destruction of Rent Control.

6. The statewide vote.

7. Subsequent activities.

8. City Council UNPASSED Condo Conversion initiative.

9. Prior reports in this series.

1. Introduction.

The final regular meeting of the Cambridge City Council in 2021 had an action on Condo Conversion that I simply did not understand because I do not fully understand the finer aspects of their rules.  It gets worse because the proposal in question is so horribly complicated that I really do not have the time at this moment to analyze it.  Looking at the agenda for the first substantive meeting of the new City Council, it looks like the concept was simply killed with a complicated report put into the record.

It could be of value to go over past actions and to place the current situation in context.

Of major importance in trying to understand the Cambridge City Council, as repeatedly presented in these pages is the flat out fraud which is the reality behind the nonstop loud proclamations of environmental sainthood.

My factsheet on the City Council’s ongoing fight for massive destruction on the Charles River says all that really needs to be said on that ongoing lie:

2. Very Early General History of Condo Conversion / Tenant Protections.

A. My record.

In the 60's, the City of Cambridge enacted Rent Control.  Also during that decade, the City Council fired James Leo Sullivan as City Manager.  Related to that Robert Healy was removed as assistant city manager.  In retrospect, both actions would appear to have major connection to actions of “radicals” in the City of Cambridge.

As I have reported earlier, during the 60's I attended the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, graduating in 1968.  During the 1967 - 1968 school year, I was a member of the Student Senate working on rules changes.  

It would be reasonable to say I kept the campus from exploding during the first semester because I went around to dorm leaders highly unhappy with the Administration’s handling of rules changes cowritten by me.  I persuaded those leaders that I thought the administration was acting in good faith and proposed a technique by which we would could achieve activist goals without personal endangerment by anybody.

Between semesters, action was taken which demonstrated bad faith.  In the first spring semester meeting of the student senate a senator proposed a highly activist motion in response to the rather clear bad faith.  The proposal would have put the student senate in favor of the sort of action I had promised in the first semester.  I wound up the embodiment in the Student Senate of that proposal.  In contrast to what I had been working for in the first semester.  That made me the public embodiment of the issue and put me highly endangered, exactly the opposite of my goal of nobody endangered.  

“Radicals” tried to take over that issue.  They, in a matter of minutes went from fighting the Vietnam War to fighting for the rules changes we wanted.  The radicals obtained an extremely large open campus meeting with the Dean of Students fighting for our proposal.  In that meeting, they displayed extreme lack of knowledge of key matters on campus.  They were griping about things for which I had no doubt I and my fellow Student Senators could get people fired, and they were totally oblivious.  They were clearly incompetent.  We were embarrassed.

Nevertheless, the Student Senate President quietly negotiated with the Dead of Students with very active assistance of female senators who were newly strengthened by earlier changes in rules.  Those quiet negotiations achieved MORE from the Dean of Students than our proposal had asked for.

When I returned for Homecoming, in a coffee gathering, the Dean of Students was kind enough to call me “the most dangerous student on campus.”

B. Cambridge moves away from the Radicals of the 60's.

In 1974, the City Council rehired James Leo Sullivan.  James Leo Sullivan rather clearly was unhappy with his prior firing.  He proposed the creation of “Neighborhood Associations.”  A lot of the “Neighborhood Associations” he created had the stench of company unions, exactly the opposite of the radical related groups which apparently got him fired.

For the next more than 40 years, Cambridge was managed by James Leo Sullivan and hand picked successors, Healy and Rossi.  I have gone over outrages associated with the James Leo Sullivan dynasty against which I fought.  

There were clear successes by opponents of the Sullivan dynasty.  Many successes were based on non Cambridge governmental entities.  Matters solely within Cambridge saw “activists” who, on scratching the surface looked dominated by the Cambridge Development Department as agent for the James Leo Sullivan city manager machine.   Actions solely in Cambridge were frequently highly irresponsible.

Blatant lies on many development issues backfired because of sanity in the non Cambridge entities because they were responsible entities.  In Cambridge, I was an active but not personally visible opposition on solely internal development matters.  I assisted local groups which had responsible goals, with a majority of my activities successful.  

The friends of the City Manager were a tiny number but they were very loud.  They also were personally driven on development issues and very happy to spend their lives on them.  People who want responsible development are oriented on specific issues and the last thing they want is to spend their lives fighting against the City Manager’s clique.  I definitely agreed with the latter.  I just kept seeing yet another situation which bothered me.

There were two very real political parties in Cambridge.  The “liberals” were pro rent control and sounded great on the right kind of issues while being too environmentally destructive in reality.  The “conservatives” opposed rent control and were more flexible on development issues.  The “liberals” had the Cambridge Civic Association as their party.  The “conservatives” were not as organized in substance, but nevertheless agreed on a lot.  They, in contrast to the CCA, were called the “independents.”  

It was not particularly surprising to see that getting “independent” votes on development issues could be key.  “Independent” votes forced the CCA to behave as the liberals they claimed to be.

Please see my reports as stated in the final section for greater detail, with more coming.

3. Evolvement of Tenant Rights, the first Condo Conversion protections.

In the 70's, David Sullivan created an organization which called him the embodiment of tenant rights.  It is my understanding that he had no involvement in the creation of Rent Control in the 60's.  The Radicals who were in the middle of Rent Control’s creation had their own organizations, PLURAL.  

David Sullivan was elected to the City Council with plans to provide greater protection for tenants by closing the loophole of Condo Conversion which allowed tenant eviction by purchasers of Condominiums units which were created by condo conversion of rent controlled housing.  Individuals bought rent controlled housing to move into individual apartments as their residences by evicting the tenants.

In a subsequent election, William Walsh ran.  He was a lawyer who had been extremely active in condo conversions.  David Sullivan and Walsh had a public election related debate in which neither candidate “drew blood.”  I, as an audience member, was the only person in the room who “drew blood.”  

I raised a key question which neither of the candidates cared to discuss which “drew blood.”  This exchange put me in the cross-hairs of Walsh’s people, BUT Walsh, in spite of our differences on Rent Control, was a highly responsible person on other issues.

David Sullivan and his compatriots closed the condo conversion loophole.  I was one of the last victims of condo conversion of rent controlled housing.

4. Zoning, tenant issues and reality in Cambridge.  .

I, as an activist, remained involved in tenant issues, but there were a lot of folks involved in tenant issues.  I realized that there was next to nobody meaningfully working on environmentalism.  While continuing in tenant issues, I concentrated on using the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance as an environmental tool.  Zoning votes can BE FORCED on the City Council by filing properly written zoning petitions.  I worked with neighborhood groups as a corporate memory and as draftsman of many such successful petitions.

Cambridge was and continues to be (I guess) one of the most densely developed communities in the United States.  But the zoning laws emphasized jobs instead of balance.  There was no real concern for the fact that massive job generation WITHOUT CORRESPONDING HOUSING had the built in result of more and more cars on the streets with their exhaust.

My goals, and I have achieved a lot, were and continue to be housing and open space.  Housing close to jobs means less pollution because workers have a shorter distance to commute.

In the meantime, William Walsh was key in my most spectacular victory, the changing of zoning in the eastern part of Harvard Square so that the zoning recognized and respected the importance of the area to the adjacent neighborhoods while still allowing reasonably large construction.

This zoning was destroyed in early 2020 by the last Cambridge City Council as part of a massive upzoning of Harvard Square targeted at creating “politically correct” destruction of historical buildings, housing and open space.  This upzoning rewards Harvard University to move parts of its Harvard Square campus to a coming campus in the Allston neighborhood of Boston which now contains an I90 (Massachusetts Turnpike) exit / entrance to Cambridge, Brookline and two neighborhoods of Boston.  I have had major victories in that planning process.

5. The internal destruction of Rent Control.

The Radicals evolved while keeping the semblance of different groups.

A couple of radical groups joined into a larger group which paired with David Sullivan’s front organization as the two primary tenant groups.

Three men turned out to be key in the evolution of tenant activism.  I will call them Alpha, Beta, and Charley.  Alpha and Beta were dominant in the radicals tenant organization.  Charley was involved in the 60's creation and resumed activism during the landlords’ fight to kill Rent Control in the 90's.  I worked with Charley on a zoning change in the Riverside neighborhood which he led and kept from going anywhere using a unique skill of his.  He was brilliant at preventing action by talking and talking and talking.  I finally, with regret, withdrew from that well written initiative because, in my opinion, he had stalled the organization beyond the point where the City Council was likely to achieve their goals.

Another part of my activities was to assist the other major remnant of the 60's radicals.  They called themselves the Simplex Steering Committee.  The Massachusetts Institute of Technology turned a massive area between Central Square and the MIT campus into a many acre wasteland by purchasing properties and, as businesses departed for their own reasons, NOT REPLACING THE DEPARTING BUSINESSES.  MIT created a wasteland where there had been thriving industry.

I did the legal drafting for the Simplex Steering Committee in its first three attempts to get Cambridge zoning direction on the future of the Simplex wasteland created by MIT.

The James Leo Sullivan city manager machine created power by skillful appointments which both achieved valuable benefits to the city and which made the appointees indebted to the James Leo Sullivan city manager machine.  The city manager machine gave power to the Simplex Steering Committee by giving it the Cambridge Economic Opportunity Committee.  By giving the Simplex people this goody, the city manager machine created a situation where it had the power to punish unacceptable behavior.  The City Manager machine opposed Rent Control.

The separate tenant organizing groups combined into one.  The remnants of the David Sullivan group accurately decided that Alpha and Beta were destructive to the tenant cause by destructive activities which kept the tenant movement from aggressive behavior to expand tenant protections.  In hindsight, I think Alpha and Beta were protecting the Simplex people’s golden egg, CEOC.

The David Sullivan group tried to expel Alpha and Beta from the tenant group.  The key vote saw a whole bunch of people brought in by the radicals.  They knew nothing except that Alpha and Beta were the “good guys.”  In the final vote, Alpha and Beta were not expelled, by one vote.  I stupidly thought I could work with them and voted against expulsion.

In 1983, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts voted in a statewide Condo Conversion statute which protected tenants from eviction for condo conversion.  The statute exempted Cambridge and Brookline from the statute to avoid the complexities of integrating the new statute into the existing Condo Conversion protections in those communities.

Rent control in Cambridge exempted new construction as of the effective date, approximately 1968.  The impact of exempting new construction from Cambridge rent control and condo protections made residents of housing built in 1968 to 1983 have the least condo eviction protections in Massachusetts.

I pushed in tenant circles to get city council candidates to support condo eviction protections for those tenants.  Alpha and Beta aggressively fought to prevent that expansion of protections.  In the second election in which I sought such commitments, I got a vote of the organization to get such a commitment from candidates.  Alpha and Beta simply ignored the vote they had lost.  They managed the election fight scaring tenant activists against and all increases in tenant protections.

Alpha and Beta turned the tenant movement into a Company Union against expansion of protections, and in the process protected the Simplex people’s CEOC bennies.

They made Cambridge tenant activists switch from the high minded activism of the 60's to look like a self-serving situation.  The stench assisted in the loss of a very close election.

6. The statewide vote.

Cambridge Landlords organized a statewide referendum to kill Rent Control.

There was a statewide pro Rent Control organization created representing people in various communities.  Alpha and Beta were members, as was Charley.

I, because of fear of the destructive record of Alpha and Beta, instead became a director of the Massachusetts Tenant Organization and worked for the cause from that perspective.

I tried to rid the pro Rent Control group of Alpha and Beta because of their destructive record and from a very great fear that, as part of that record, they would be harmful.

The report I got from a participant in the statewide Rent Control group was that the group had been kept from actions in its meeting by disputes among the Cambridge participants.  For years, I blamed Alpha and Beta.

Long after the fight, I put together a bunch of threads, ALONG WITH THE VERY CLEAR ADMISSION OF Charley, and decided that Charley very clearly prevented action of the statewide Rent Control organization exactly as he prevented that zoning petition from happening years earlier by talking and talking and talking.

One of the Company Union games played by the entities controlled by the Cambridge City Manager machine was to “keep people out of trouble” by chasing their tails on fights which could not achieve their purported objectives.

Charley fought for such a goal in the statewide Rent Control organization.  Alpha and Beta realized the danger of his demand and bitterly fought against the destruction of the cause.  Charley demanded that the organization fight for Rent Control AS A SUBSIDY FOR TENANTS AT THE EXPENSE OF LANDLORDS.

Alpha and Beta were well aware that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision legalizing Rent Control in 1976 explicitly legalized Rent Control as a consumer protection.  The decision clearly stated that THE MINUTE Rent Control became a tax on landlords, Rent Control was illegal as a taking of property.

Charley would not allow the statewide organization to meaningful work.  He used his highly skillful preventing of action by talking and talking and talking in attempt to force approval of his suicidal language.  Alpha and Beta knew what his demands would do and fought him.

My source was of the very strong opinion that, because of the vast amounts of time wasted by Charley, the statewide group was kept from meaningfully organizing and IT WAS A CLOSE VOTE.  Charley almost certainly destroyed rent control single-handedly.

I was one of the first tenants to lose my home.  I had lived there for 14 years.

7. Subsequent activities.

After the death of Rent Control, the radicals IMMEDIATELY noticed the 1968-83 tenants they had been fighting against, and fought for their protection.

There were two subsequent referenda in Cambridge on the reestablishment of Rent Control, both Radical proposals.

Charley demanded and achieved his language in both referenda, turning both referenda into Company Union initiatives.  Spend years achieving “rent control” which would be certain to be thrown out by the courts.

8. City Council UNPASSED Condo Conversion initiative.

As I said, I simply did not waste my time on the horribly complicated initiative which prominently did not pass in 2021.  It looks like it simply failed of achievement but was loudly broadcast in the last Cambridge City Council meeting of 2021.

My fear was Charley’s language or the equivalent.

There may be further action.  The unpassed proposal certainly is available to serve as a model.

Myself, I did not waste my time on it last year, and I will not worry about it until I have to.

9. Prior reports in this series.

A. Cambridge City Council considers rewriting the functioning of the City of Cambridge.   I.  A personal prequil, https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2021/05/, Blog, 5/31/21

B. Cambridge City Council considers rewriting the functioning of the City of Cambridge.   2.  Very early history. PARTIAL transportation analysis, https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2021/06/cambridge-city-council-considers.html, Blog, 6/6/21.

C. Cambridge City Council considers rewriting the functioning of the City of Cambridge.   III.  Major  transportation "planning" problems, https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2021/06/,  Blog, 6/16/21

D. Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council considers rewriting the functioning of the City of Cambridge.   IV.  A nightmare begins, https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2021/08/cambridge-ma-usa-city-council-considers.html, Blog, 8/21/21.